Someecards is so damn funny. Too funny, apparently for Apple.
In a move that is only surprising because Apple has been getting better about ridiculous app rejections, Apple has rejected Someecards iPhone app on the grounds that it “contains objectionable content and content that ridicules public figures.” Anyone who has ever visited Someecards will know that this is standard practice, and one of the things that makes the site so funny.
So who are those public figures? Well one is Hilter. Another is Michael Richards (Kramer from Seinfeld). And a third is Roman Polanski (by way of Jack Nicholson).
Ridiculing Hitler should need no explanation (and, to be fair, Apple perhaps didn’t care too much about that but maybe more about the Jewish reference — which was in reference to Inglourious Basterds, a great movie, by the way). Michael Richards was being ridiculed for his racist outburst a few years ago. And Roman Polanski about his conviction for statutory rape (which happened at Jack Nicholson’s house in the 1970s).
Those are the three images Apple included in their note back to Someecards about what they found objectionable. Now, to be sure, all of those jokes are best suited for a mature audience, but Someecards did rate their app as 17+. More importantly, all are clearly satire, something which is protected by the First Amendment.
And best of all, once again this is a case of Apple rejecting an app for containing content that you can just as easily get on your iPhone by directing your Safari web browser to someecards.com. The main difference is that with an app, there is some level of protection (if parents choose to turn it on) to block kids from using it. On the iPhone web version, all are welcome!
You may recall that at one point, Apple had rejected an app that contained the famous Shepard Fairey “Hope” picture of Barack Obama. The reasoning for that was also that it “ridiculed public figures.” Apple changed it tune on that eventually, and hopefully they will here as well. Satire is satire, and it’s all on the web, and it’s funny. Lighten up, Apple.
First amendment doesn’t really have anything to do with what a private company allows on their platform…
well, technically they’re a public company, but still your point is right, they can do what they want. but if it’s good enough for the constitution, shouldn’t it be good enough for the App Store?
How about just “good?” The whole myth of Apple is that it’s the goodest company ever and anybody who competes with Apple is evil and anybody who bests them is super-evil.
So…how is arbitrary censorship “good?” I mean, except when Apple does it, clearly.
There’s nothing funny about any of the cards above. They’re crude, ugly, and could get Apple in trouble. The implication that Jack Nicholson has sex with underage girls is lawsuit material. The racial comments are the kind of things closet racists say.
Oh, lighten up.
What’s the matter, creep? Am I spoiling the Apple-hating party for you and all the basement dwelling Microsoft gamer egoist creeps here at TC?
Um. Roman Polanski raped a 13-year-old girl in Jack Nicholson’s hot tub. That’s an undisputed (not by Polanski, who pled guilty, and not by Jack Nicholson) fact.
Idiot.
…and that same first amendment doesn’t prevent criticism of their policies thereto.
However, I think the issue here is that MG seems to have made a category error (well, it’s just a blog, right?) in saying the 1A allows satire, when it really seems to be that he’s attempting to describe fair-use under copyright law as a possible defense by someecards if in fact Apple is rejecting them on IP grounds. Hard to tell though, what with his writing skill and all. Eh, what do you expect from a PR agency.
Hater say what?
nope. that’s just not right at all.
color me skeptical
This is extremely common practice for Apple. I’ve had apps refused for exactly the same reason since they contained caricatures of public figures. Apple is all about censorship these days.
This is dissapointing – someecards are usually hilarious – would be nice to have an app on my phone from them.
Do you see Apple turning this over if it gets enough attention in the media? I do. Hope so at least.
Why is the First Amendment so misunderstood? The First Amendment only protects you from government interference in your freedom of speech. It says so quite clearly. And while this is a stupid decision on Apple’s part, it has absolutely nothing to do with the First Amendment.
yes, we get it. point being that it’s something protected by the constitution, but that’s good enough for apple’s app store rules.
I think there is a first amendment angle here. Apple is rejecting apps that it thinks could get it in trouble (or at least that seems to be the intent of its policies). If people cared more about the first amendment, they would defend common carriers that distribute objectionable content, instead of attacking them.
Last time I checked Apple is a public company.
The first amendment controls the GOVERNMENT’S behaviour vis-a-vis free speech
sLiPpErY sLoPe
With all these iPhone killers coming to market now, it’s Apple’s business to lose.
That’s ok, I’m guessing soon we’ll be able to use someecards on facebook mobile. Someecards to me is more successful as a plugin than a destination. Maybe they should focus on getting into Tweetie 2 too.
It’s funny that after Mike Arrngton’s ridiculous, incessant harping on facebook for ‘allowing hate speech’, we find gratuitous use of hitler imagery on techcrunch
Apple is beginning to act more like Microsoft.
With Apple increasingly tightening it’s control in the middle of an escalating battle for the mobile desktop I wonder if they are gonna make the same mistakes they made in the late 80’s and early 90’s when they lost the battle for the computer desktop.
Back then it was all about “control” and “closed systems”. Seems a replay of old times, albeit, with a new smaller piece of screen real estate.
Just saying.
Don Makoviney
Makovision.com
“I wonder if they are gonna make the same mistakes they made in the late 80’s and early 90’s when they lost the battle for the computer desktop.”
They already are, almost exactly. Honestly, I think Apple’s whole game plan, here, is based on them gaining significant market share with the iPods and iPhones. However, they did that, too, with the Mac – I’m a designer, I was the first designer I knew to go Windows in 1992, and…you just didn’t do that, then.
The creative space belonged to Apple until…well, until Photoshop 3 hit, and after that, Adobe’s market was like seventy-five percent Windows and climbing. My girlfriend is also a designer, about ten years younger than I am, and when she started a college design program in ‘97, they forced everybody to buy Macs, even if they already owned perfectly good PCs and all the required software. That just wouldn’t happen, anymore – you couldn’t possibly get away with it.
They’ve lost core markets before, just because they’re arrogant dicks who tend to charge ahead without thinking, because God Is On Their Side. It can easily happen again this time, and…I think it’s a gimme that it’s going to.
Pride goeth before a fall, or something. And then another fall if you don’t learn anything.
if they are public company they should not be doing this and this application is really cool.
That’s too bad because someecards is absolutely hilarious and can turn a bad day completely around.
But there’s always Google’s Android app store…somehow I see this example endemic of what will eventually cost Apple significant market share in the coming Smart Phone Wars.
Understood!
I can’t wait for someecards to come up with a card for this shenanigans! The censorship police, I mean Apple, should really lighten up.
Somecards would make a brilliant app, and Apple really needs to reconsider this foolish decision. On the other hand I just found a book of hilarious somecards postcards at Barnes&Noble. Okay so I admit it, I still use the US Mail, I can’t help it, I’m old!
Steve Jobs hates funny. Or maybe he just doesn’t understand what comedy is or how it works?
Perhaps if they’d just made it make farting noises it would have been instantly approved.
They agree with you:
http://twitter....atus/4690428614
I heart someecards for that.
FTW
Apple can do whatever they wish..they rejected my iPhone App iBlood.Net giving me a privacy concerns..they didn’t bother to send any email..just a phone call and that’s it..
When I asked why it’s getting refused..I was told this app is sharing “bodily fluid info” which is against Apple’s policy…
App Store is full with social networking apps where people are sharing everyhing..
I wanted to make iPhone really useful at the time of need and wanted to put an app which can help needy people in finding the blood donors who are regsitered on the app.
I am really disappointed as Apple has focus to make iPhone just a fun device…
Apple have one more thing in common with Wal Mart now. They are easily offended and humorless.
“Now?” Apple’s never had any sense of humor about itself. It’s the malignant narcissist of late tech giants, IMO. (MS is just a run-of-the-mill megalomaniac. They’re easier to deal with.)
When will Apple come up with a policy that is consistent (even if it ruffles feathers)? The inconsistency is what drives app developers crazy.
a picture of hitler in your post and relating is to apple is a little extreme. You shouldnt light heartedly picture anyone in that light..
I don’t think its a public/private issue. It’s just a large corporation being uncool. And uncool is something you don’t want to associate with Apple, so therein lies the ‘Apple Fail’.
Apple has the right to reject any app they want to, but we, the consumers, have the right to ridicule them for doing so too.
And please, don’t tell me that Apple couldn’t see the humor in Someecards and say that they were ‘ridiculing’ public figures. Half of celebrity culture is based on making fun of them
Does Onion have an iPhone app? If yes, how is it faring?
Man, those are some great lines — I wonder if you can get those lines into other apps on the grounds of humor
Maybe they should license out their content to other apps and go under the radar? or do it in exchange for ad revenue. The only problem is the virility of the jokes, they may be caught too quickly
it’s not funny, actually
You don’t think its funny, so in posting your comment, you seem to think that Apple is right in not allowing anyone access to it.
So if you found something hilarious, or even slightly amusing, or hell, even an app that helped you be more productive, and I thought it was offensive, how would you feel if my distaste for it prevented you from using it at all?
Thats what this boils down to. There is a market for the most crude, and offensive stuff out there. Its well known that Apple doesn’t want the iPhone to become a medium for mobile porn and racism propaganda; however, they’re inconsistently banning most of the things that come across their desk that have a racial, sexual, or crude tone. If they learned how to see the intent in an iPhone app and weeds out the bad ones (ie, an app that clearly explains the best way to break the law and not get caught), then that would be fine. But they aren’t…